Variety (Dec 1942)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

IR PICTURES Wednesday, December 23, 1942 Much Back-of-the-Wasliiiigton-Scene | censiirThreatJj Stuff Fpres in MeDett Vs. Hollywood "" Washington, Dec. 22. De!<pite the publicity given over the weekend to Lowell Mellett's re- quest to Hollywood studios to submit all scripts to the Office o( War In- formation, it's understood that's not the point that principally has the producers hot. What has them irked Is said to be an entirely unpublished request that the film industry handle all its dealing with Washington, through the Bureau of Motion Pic- tures of the OWI, which Mellett heads. Not only the producers themselves, but the entire Hays office exec per- sonnel is understood to be extreme- ly riled at Mellett's effort to funnel the entire industry-to-Government relationship through his office. It's recognized at the same time by Washington observers, who have seen the disputed letter, that it was written with the best of intentions and couched in he friendliest terms. However, if the OWI exec was serious about channeling all of the motion picture industry's contacts with Washington over his desk, the opinion here is that he was acting naively. Too many people repre- senting Hollywood in one way or another have too many tentacles extended into too many corners to ever expect that Mellett could get them to bring all their requests to him. To many of these people, the plac- ing of their knowledge of inside Washington into the service of the picture industry is their principal means of support. So, obviously, Mellett let himself into a hornet's nest by asking that a practice of long and honored standing be abandoned ioT anything as minor as increased efficiency. The film Industry, of course, isn't alone in using the devious approach in Washington. Every industry, from steel to doughnuts, does things ex- actly the same way—via the back- door rather than the direct method. And, of course, it occasionally pays off in. the end. Indnatry's Own B«ps Perhaps the best known of the *working reps of the industry here are Tony Muto, who watches out for the 20th-Fox interests; Carter Baron, who takes care of details for Loew's, and Claude Collins, who 'co- ordinates' the news reels. In addi- tion, of course, J. Robert Rubin, Metro v.p, Harry W. Warner and other industry toppers are frequent visitors. Not to be forgotten, either, is the fact that WendeU WUlkie is chairman of the 20th-Fox board and has some friends of his own in the capital Hays office, too, has ade- quate Washington representation. Mellett's suggestion that he'd take care of all D. C. affairs for the in- dustry was not without a basis of need. So many film people have been pouring into Washington with so many angles that they have cre- 'ated considerable confusion which kicks back at Hollywood. Industry itself recognized that fact a couple weeks ago when the War Activities Committite a^ked that all filmiles check with it before journeying to the shores of the Potomac. Although the suggestion they handle their Washington matters through Mellett is said to be the principal irc-rouser in the letter, producers let it be known here that they don't like the script- o.o.ing either. That they should feel so violently about it as they are said to, however, comes as a surprise to industry observers in the capital. They point out that Mellett merits more faith than that, as he has re- peatedly proved himself a friend of Hollywood, a conservative influenQ^ in opposition to the 'take-em-over' school. His gesture last week in slashing his own office's demand for raw stock to allow more to go to the newsreels is a sign of leaning toward as complete freedom as possible for private industry, it is said. Last line of Mellet's letter specifi- cally states that the film activities of the Office of Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs are not to be construed as subject to the re- quests contained therein. That's in keeping with the Presidential order setUng up the OWI, which left the Rockefeller committee a purely independent Government en- tity. • » - >.■»•-■» . • V fj- ••'. ■ . 4i MeUett's Letter to Film Studios Quite Pointed Lowell Mellett's letter to the stu dios states that all contacts with any Government agencies 'including the armed forces' regarding motion pictures should be cleared through the Bureau of Motion Pictures. He adds, significantly, 'For the benefit of both your studio and for the Of- fice of War Information it would be advisable to establish a routine pro- cedure whereby our Hollywood of- fice would receive copies of studio treatment or synopsis of ALL stories which you contemplate producing... We should like also to set up a routine procedure and arrangement whereby our Hollywood office may view all pictures in the long cut. While this Is rather late in the op- eration to introduce any new mat- ters, it would make it possible for us to recommend the deletion of any of the material which may be harm- ful to the war effort. 'Questions involving relations and policies with foreign governments should be cleared through the Hol- lywood office. The OWI is in con- tact with every friendly neutral government and is in a position to give authoritative advice regarding both our own attitude and that of foreign governments . . . Questions Involving L>atin America should be cleared through the office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Af- fairs. Mellett points out that his office has no authority regarding censor- ship of foreign exports but that it has representatives as advisors to the Board of Review in the Office of Censorship. EXTRAS ZSOG OVER LAST YR. Hollywood, Dec. 22. Film fextras will earn about $250,- 000 more this year than they did in IMl, according to placement fig- ures released by Central Casting Corp. Earnings for last year were $3,118,411, covering 266,125 jobs. In the first 11 months of 1B42 the wages were $3,030,112, with around $300,- 000 estimated for December. Increases in wages is due largely to the practical elimination of the $6.50 calls. During the current year, few of the regular atmosphere players have accepted tickets for less than $10.50 per Sa'y. So many casual players have gone into war production in the neighboring fac- tories that film producers can't find enough extras without paying the $10.50 rate. Shortage is expected to become even more serious when the' Manpower Commission starts shift- ing workers into essential industry Jobs. Heaviest month of 1942 was July, with 32,757 extra jobs passed out by Central Casting. Banner month of 1941 was April, with a record of 33,438. STUDIOS TO COMPETE FOR SIGNAL CORPS PIX Holljrwood, Dec. 22. Independent producers, as well as majors, will get an even chance to bid on future films to be made for U. S. Signal Corps, according to Col M. E, GiUette, representing the War Dept., at a meeting of indie picture makers. Signal Corps film requirements for the next year. Col. GUlette explained, will need a large portion of Holly- wood's facilities and manpower. Contracts and scripts will be open to competitive bidding by all produc- ing companies now in business. Skirting the War Side Hollywood, Dec. 22. Feminine Influence in the military setup will be pictured in 'Five Little Ladies at War,' the next production by Jack Schwartz for Producers Re- leasing Corp. Arthur Drlefuss, who wrote the story, wHl<diT(Kt.- and going home last week, but those interviewed expressed strong support for the New York stage cleanup and conviction. The anti-Hollywood group contends that there is a move- ment on foot, definite and militant, to open up the stage and screen to licentiousness and indecencies under the guise of war liberalism. 'If we permit profanity and vulgarisms on the screen, it is the opening wedge to strip-tease, and all the filth and exhibitionism of burlesque,' one of the house leaders told a group of Baltimore clergymen. 'The country vigilant about protecting the morals of the men in uniform, and we must be equally on the qui vive to see that these smart purveyors do not corrupt the home front with an immoral scr.een.' Some saw in the Office of War Information suggestion that it okay all scenarios and screen treatments a repercussion from the Maryland District of Columbia sermon of Sunday (13) when, all Catholic pul- pits renewed their allegiance to the Legion of Decency, and promised to abide by its rating on pictures It's 'VolnnUry,' S«ys Mellett Lowell Mellett, director of the mo- tion picture division. Office of War Information, at once declared he had not enunciated a new OWI policy. He declared that the directive to producers was merely a reiteration of earlier 'voluntary' suggestions, and reaffirmed that he was without the power of compulsion There were hurried long-distance calls to Washington from the pro duction centre after Nelson Poynter of OWI had delivered hU letter. 'Is this a feeler for more power put out as a trial balloon?' was the tenor of the queries. 'If it la, we propose to fight it. This is putting one foot in the door, and if accepted meekly, will be the first step towards a more rigid federal censorship.' Up to date every policy fixed by Lowell Mellett has been rigidly fol- lowed. At his suggestion Noel Cow- ard's picture 'In Which We Serve' had a sentence deleted that might have been regSrded as offensive to Italian-Americans. Metro-Goldwyn- Mayer went to considerable expense to revise 'Tennessee Johnson,' and soften up the character of Thad Stevens lest it offend colored pa- trons of the movies. Stevens is an idol of the colored people, and they are solidly New Deal. The plan to remake 'Birth Of A Nation' was abandoned because of OWI influence, and producer Sam Goldwyn placed a reissue, 'The Real Glory,' on the shelf after Mellett had pointed out It was offensive to Filipinos. The reentry of Joe Breen into the production code picture gives the Hays organization a strong card. Breen has powerful friends in Con- gress, among them Representative McGranery of Pennsylvania and other members of the House com- mittee, which will consider any re- strictive legislation. The disposition now is to watch Hollywood closely. They don't like Hollywood buy- ing Gypsy Rose Lee's story The G-String Murder,' and this feature will be scanned closely for off-color material. Neither do they like Hol- lywood dickering for 'Strip for Ac- tion.' These are considered fore- boding signs, and producers wUl find a Congressional red light to 'stop'— and at .once—unless they want Uncle Sam to really pass on their scripts before the cameras roll. D. C Press Views Mellett's Stand On Film Scripts As Censorship Wei^e Washington, Dec. 22. There seems to be a wide dl- vfgence of opinion between the Office of War Information and the motion picture industry as to the effect and the significance of the recent request made of studio heads by Lowell Mellett. chief of the OWI motion picture bureau, that they submit all proposed screen treat' that are deemed detrimental to the war effort. The OWI has taken pains to emphasize that its powers are merely advisory and that its request should not be interpreted as consti- tuting blanket censorship. Never- theless it seems to us that-the. OWI has no business making such a re- quest.' Hollywood Knows better 'To our way of thinking' the Post ments of pictures to OWI for re- j I II ^«TT u .1 I editorial continued 'the ^idustry as Officially, OWI has Uken the I 9„ „^H*nrpH «nnr<.U»r th^ view that there was nothing in Mel- lett's request that should get Holly- MORE SOVIET WAR PIX Patlic Takes 'Bom^Inf of Moscow' And Others on the V. S. Block Artkino, Inc., Yank distrib of So- viet films, last ^ week sold a four- reel documentary. Hie Bombing of Moscow.' to Pathe. Latter will re- make into a one-reeler and release through RKO. Buy was an outright sale. Currently being considered are offers, by several of the majors, for 'The Siege of Leningrad' and 'A Day at War.' The 'Leningrad' pic was mentioned by Wendell Willkie who caught it during his recent stay in Moscow. Day At War' is a com- pilation of clips gathered by USSR photographers in one day and covers the entire fighting front, from Finnish front down to the Black Sea. All films recently arrived from Moscow. • ■ ' wood producers stirred up and that the letter to the studios was a 'rou- tine communication' from the OWI motion picture chief. It has main- tained that the letter merely pro- vided for continuing practices which the studios themselves had volun- tarily initiated and that it contained little of a new nature. However, two leading Capital newspapers, Washington Post and Evening Star, speaking editorially, have taken the view that the OWI request gives the motion picture in- dustry something to think about. If not worry about. To the Post it seemed that OWI had 'no business making such a request.' The Star held that 'voluntary compliance is too apt to be the opening wedge for a system in which compulsory compliance is understooi:.' Elmer Davis, director of the OWI, stood by his motion picture bureau chief on the issue and took the view that there was not any Government compulsion behind the request to studio heads. Elmer Ihtvia' Slateraent OWI Director Davis gave the fol- lowing statement to 'Variety' on Sunday (20): 'I am fully informed as to what Mr. Mellett is doing and is mean- ing to do, which is not what excited people in Hollywood and elsewhere seem to think he means to do. Mr. Mellett's statement yesterday re- garding the purpose of his proposal seems to me to be perfectly clear.' The statement Davis referred to was one given by Mellett explaining the request made in his letter to the studios. In this statement, Mellett commented on Hollywood reports that producers were 'confused' by his request that screen treatments and scenarios of all motion pictures be submitted to the OWI before the pictures are produced. All the major studios have been submitting their picture ideas to the Government for at least six months, he said. Mellett explained that the arrangement was purely voluntary and that it had originated with the producers themselves. There was no idea of making submission com- pulsory, he added. Mellett said he had sent the letter to Hollywood studios asking that they submit film scenarios to OWI in advance of production but pointed out that his was 'a routine communi- cation' which merely reviewed the existing relationships between the motion picture industry and the Government •Actually the only new thing in the letter,' Mellet stated, 'wac a-mes- sage advising the producers of an arrangement between OWI and the armed services by which OWI will participate in supervising pictures concerning the services.' Mellett said that Davis had re- viewed the letter which he sent to the studios. OWI motion picture bureau chief told 'Variety' that he felt Hollywood was raising 'a tempest in a teapot' over the matter of his letter. D. C. Dallies Differ The Capital's press, however, did not agree with either Davis or Mel- lett as to the significance of the OWI request. Neither the Post nor the Star regarded the affair as a 'tempest In a'teapot.' Both attached very se- rious implications to the motion pic- ture industry of the action. 'Why it should be advisable for the Office of War Information to scru- tinize all film scenarios whether or not they have anything to do with the war is beyond us' the Post de- clared. 'Yet the OWI's film division has asked to see not only all movie scripts before production but has also requested a preview of pictures "in the rough' before their release to the public. The intention of course is to enable the Government to make con- structive suggestions as well as to recommend the droppfng of scenes an experienced appraiser of the pub. lie is a better judge of what helps and what harms the war effort than the OWI. Moreover as Mr. Mellett has pointed out, the industry has been cooperating with the OWI right along. Presumably, therefore, it would continue to do so without the irritat- ing pressure implicit in the OWI's new request 'Blanket censorship may not be the issue here but an unnecessary official encroachment is certainly involved. And if there is one thing the country needs it is less, not more, official in- terference in a business which, like press and radio, should have a mini- mum of superimposed restraint in ord^r to serve the public as well as it could and should be served.' The Star declai'ed tiie motion pic ture industry has a responsibility to the public 'to keep the screen free.' PIx Has Done a Good Job The moving picture industry has taken advantage of its unexcelled opportunity to use its facilities for the war effort and in the opinion of observers has done a good job,' the Star asserted. 'But it is only natural that the industry seems to view with considerable skepticism a proposal from Lowell Mellett chief of the OWI's motion picture bureau, that screen treatments and scenarios be submitted to the OWI before they are produced.' The moving pictures, like the press, should properly regard with suspicion every move which, aside from matters involving militaiy secretary, stiggests Government ap- proval as a prerequisite of produc- tion or publication,.' the editorial continued. The question of whether compliance with Government ap- proval is voluntary is not particu- larly important. For voluntary compliance Is too apt to be the open- ing wedge for a system in which compulsory compliance is under- stood. 'When the Government sets up a system of review to accommodate the moving picture industry, at the request of the moving picture in- dustry, and to meet a real demand —that is one thing. When the Gov- ernment asks the moving picture in- dustry to set up a system which definitely injects governmental ap- proval as a part of motion picture production, it is something else en- tirely. The screen has a re^onslble part to play in the war effort, and undoubtedly wants to do its best But it has a responsibility to the public, and that Is to keep the screen free.' foshrtoiexicoto fatten up welles pic Hollywood, Dec. 22. Norman Foster shoves off for Mex- ico City this week under a 20th-Fox contract to direct and supervise a Mexican-made picture, 'Santa,' with Esther Fernandez as star. Understood Foster may also work on additional footage for 'It's All True,' which Orson Welles started but did Bot finish for RKO. Welles is said to be negotiating witTTRKO for an additional $200,000 to com- plete the feature, on which Foster directed bullfight scenes in Mexico several months ago while Welles was working In South America. TITLE CHANGES ,_, Hollywood, Dec. 22. The Honor System' is release tag 1 'You Can't Beat the Law' at Mon- ogram. 'After Tomorrow' at PRC-Pathe became 'Behind Prison Walls.' 'Careless CIndereHa' is third title for 'Careless,' originally 'Nothing Ventured,' at Metro. Release tag on PRC's second Billy .ttie Kid' western is 'The Kid Rides Again.'